Did writer have the facts when attacking military?

Margaret Carlson’s diatribe fails to consider the factual basis of the claims. Like a true “progressive,” she considers the “seriousness of the charges” without any inquiry as to facts. How do the percentages of alleged sexual assaults in the military compare to society at large? How does the disposition rate under the Uniform Code of Military Justice compare with civilian courts?

Carlson needs to present facts to support her opinion.

No one condones sexual assault. But before she attacks the military that defends her First Amendment right to spew drivel, facts please.

Gregory Chernushin, Colorado Springs

This letter was published in the June 10 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here[2]. Follow eLetters[3] on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

The military “defends” nobody’s first amendment rights, PERIOD
The military is great at making profits soar for Rand, GE, Boeing and other armament/ordnance makers at the cost of the people being bombed and the souls of the volunteer military.

If 70% sex assault rate is at all off by a dozen percentage points, then 58% is still obscene and the culture must be quashed.

The UCMJ is unable to respond because they never see a case. Commanding officers must be relieved of duty in responding to cases of rape. Expanding UCMJ into cases replacing commanders’ “discretion” will be a big step towards making offenders responsible.

#2 Comment By thor On June 9, 2013 @ 6:12 pm

Are you saying EVERY sexual assault case is rape? If it is rape, then I agree with you. If its a pat on the butt, then you are over the top.

#3 Comment By peterpi On June 9, 2013 @ 7:19 pm

I’m not an attorney, I don’t play one on TV, but I’ve hung around way too many of them for my own good. I think that, legally, “assault” is any unwanted advance or threat, if I recall right, and “battery” is any unwanted physical contact. Technically, if I were to shove a “Gay Marriage Now!” leaflet into your hands while you passed by a marriage rally, and we made even the slightest contact, you could have me charged with battery.
But the popular meaning of “assault” is any unwanted physical contact.
I suppose an unwanted touch on the butt could be called sexual assault, but would most likely be called sexual harassment.
Rape is a form of sexual assault, legally sexual battery, but I don’t know if every sexual assault is rape.
It also sounds like you’re trying to dodge the question.
I’m surprised you’re not upset by holyreality’s hyperbolic, over-the-top depiction of the US military in general.

#4 Comment By thor On June 9, 2013 @ 8:22 pm

Help me out here. How can I be dodging the issue if I ask a question meant to clarify the issue? You spent time clarifying the issue and you accuse me of dodging. Hmmm. About HR’s over-the-top depiction, I feel that clarity on this issue is what is needed and that clarity will win out. How’s that for a dodge.

#5 Comment By TLC On June 9, 2013 @ 8:35 pm

Where did you come up with the 70% figure? That’s not even close to what’s been reported.

#6 Comment By Steve R On June 9, 2013 @ 10:47 pm

Nice job holy crap, spewing more lies about things you know nothing about! I would assume with your distinguished career in the military you would be an exert on this, yet once again your reality is distorted. While I don’t condone sexual assault of any kind, I also can’t stand people like you disparaging the incredible men and woman in the service.

#7 Comment By peterpi On June 9, 2013 @ 11:05 pm

That was one of his more, um, “creative” posts.

#8 Comment By Guest On June 10, 2013 @ 3:27 am

Holyreality is anything but…

#9 Comment By Dano2 On June 10, 2013 @ 7:58 am

I guess the letter-writer doesn’t mind that we spend $600+Bn a year on an outfit that doesn’t have proper discipline, doesn’t respect women, and has a culture of intimidation for the weak. How sad. Apparently this letter-writer is incapable of imagining something better.

Best,

D

#10 Comment By Guest On June 10, 2013 @ 9:21 am

From the US News and World Report of May 8th:

“The Pentagon’s annual report on the topic this week said that
sex-related crimes went up 37 percent from last year, with 3,374 cases
of sexual assault in 2012. The report estimated, according to its own
survey, that there were 26,000 cases of unwanted sexual contact last
year. More cases involved male victims, although the percentage of the
female troops allegedly assaulted or abused – 6.1 percent – was much
higher than the 1.2 percent of men who reported improper or abusive
behavior.”

These percentages are quite low for similar groups. For instance, a study of the civilian federal workforce found 37% of the women said they experienced sexual harassment in one year but this harassment included unwanted jokes, teasing, remarks or questions. Actual rape or attempted rape was experienced by only 4% of women.

#11 Comment By holyreality On June 10, 2013 @ 9:52 am

So let the UCMJ handle it and determine what is what, something COs currently do to the detriment to their unit.

#12 Comment By holyreality On June 10, 2013 @ 9:56 am

The “incredible men and ‘woman” in the service have the lowest down and dirty scumiest job on the planet; killing other people so American corporations and banks can rake in the profit.

That is their sole purpose, why should we glorify them with superlatives rationalizing the mass murder that American war inflicts?

The most obscene of all are those who avidly believe their freedom depends on such slaughter.

#13 Comment By holyreality On June 10, 2013 @ 9:58 am

On Bill Maher, I did a double take, but have not looked it up. I posted it to exaggerate.

Say hello to the typical low information O’bozo supporter. Is it any wonder we have a clown in the White House?

#17 Comment By Guest On June 10, 2013 @ 2:04 pm

I love his assertion “That is their sole purpose…”

More gibberish from the insane asylum. Take off your Che Guevara t-shirt and stop listening to Alex Jones so much…

#18 Comment By thor On June 10, 2013 @ 3:10 pm

Thanks for the breakdown. Be careful, though, or you might be accused of dodging.

#19 Comment By holyreality On June 10, 2013 @ 3:27 pm

SO,
I’d imagine you are among the “most obscene” who believe all this killing protects you somehow.

BTW
Who is this Che fella right wingnuts complain about so much?

#20 Comment By Dano2 On June 10, 2013 @ 4:15 pm

Who is this Che fella right wingnuts complain about so much?

They give them totems to focus on. Che is one of their totems.

Best,

D

#21 Comment By thor On June 10, 2013 @ 5:47 pm

He may be a right-wing totem, but he is a left-wing hero. Why? He was a cold-blooded killer.

#22 Comment By Allen Willey On June 10, 2013 @ 5:49 pm

I testified as an outcry witness in a military rape case. Some of my fellow military members tried to discredit me by entrapment in black market deals, and my supervisor told me not to go running early in the morning alone. I lost all respect for the military after that. The right wing mindlessly worships these people, but won’t don the uniform if they can buy their way out of it, like Bush/Cheney.

#23 Comment By peterpi On June 10, 2013 @ 5:56 pm

Keep it up, thor.
Liberals love cold-blooded killers, yeah, right.
You would be outraged if liberals said “Conservatives love George W Bush, because conservatives are war-mongers.”
BTW, I never ever owned a Che t-shirt or poster. I never saw what anyone saw in the guy.

#24 Comment By thor On June 10, 2013 @ 6:44 pm

Typical pete jump. Never implied liberals love cold-blooded killers, just Che, who was a cold-blooded killer. Like you. I don’t see what they see in the guy.

#25 Comment By peterpi On June 10, 2013 @ 7:00 pm

You said he was a left-wing hero because he was a cold-blooded killer.
That’s no jump at all.

#26 Comment By thor On June 10, 2013 @ 7:50 pm

I wrote ” he is a left-wing hero. Why? He was a cold-blooded killer.” I guess you didn’t get the phrasing so i will make it easy for you to understand. He is a left-wing hero. Why? I am asking why he is popular with those on the left-wing. And I’m not talking about liberals, so there was another jump you made. Now, when I wrote that he was a cold-blooded killer, that’s because its even more confusing why he would be anyone’s hero.

#27 Comment By peterpi On June 10, 2013 @ 7:56 pm

OK, thanks. I thought you were answering your own question.

#28 Comment By thor On June 10, 2013 @ 8:00 pm

What!!!!????

#29 Comment By Allen Willey On June 10, 2013 @ 8:35 pm

That’s what.

#30 Comment By TLC On June 11, 2013 @ 6:15 am

And of the 3,374 cases, some involved men and around 1000 were dismissed as unfounded. That means that only about 1 percent of women in the military suffered from a provable case of sexual assault–which is better than the civilian rate you cite. In other words, HR and Bill Maher (apparently his source) were only off by a factor 70 or so.